Huzaifa,

The problem with you trying to link specific posts with specific people even when posted under names is that absolutely anyone can post under absolutely any name on the anonymous forum. I myself have been impersonated numerous times on the forum, including during this campaign period. As well, this was pointed out on the forum and to drive the point home some jokesters posted under campaign members names. Obviously while I understand your concerns about what is said on the forum, I don't think much if it should be taken seriously as it is still nothing but an anonymous, private forum (or as private as anything is on the internet it seems).

Don't forget to vote today and tomorrow everyone! We have absolutely great candidates to rank preferentially this year and are truly lucky!

Originally Posted by scrambles

Huzaifa,

The problem with you trying to link specific posts with specific people even when posted under names is that absolutely anyone can post under absolutely any name on the anonymous forum.

Problem with this is we have in the same message personal statements which you would only know if you knew the person as well. Such as stating you are coming down with something and feeling pretty sick. Because many of these teams know eachother on a personal level beyond campaigning, it is pretty easy to pick out the people. What is even more sad is Mary KNEW this was going on and told us, but she did not go on and ask people to stop(in her name of without a name). If she was truely worried about dirty politics she would have been proactive.

Huzaifa and Deadpool,

I understand the difficulties that come with campaigning, and how easy it is for opposing teams to blur the line between legitimate critiques of a position, and deliberate misinformation and slander. That being said, your initial concern (that Mary's campaign team was slandering Kieran's team) is clearly a valid concern. But it seems to me that you are leaving yourself wide open to rocket's claim, which was that Kieran's team is basing their platform on criticizing the actions of others, more than they are constructing an actual platform. Why do I say this?
You publicly criticized Mary's team for slander, without any justification for this. When pressed, you follow up that the A&S anonymous community board has slanderous comments regarding Kieran's team on the threads, with the names of people on Mary's campaign signed to them. When further investigated, the scenario that comes out is that the boards are anonymous and that anyone could (and likely did) post such slander. If you're aware that people are concerned that your platform is suspect in this regard, it seems to me you should take care to limit your exposure to accusations of libel. Message boads are busy and your initial post (the validity of which is open to question) stated as fact something that may or may not be true. You should either pursue and verify your accusations in this instance that Mary's campaign is using slander (by which I mean you should accuse someone and give them a chance to defend themselves fairly), or withdraw said accusations entirely. There is far too much mudslinging going on; this is 'yOUR' chance to reduce the volume, and demonstrate your integrity for the students of McMaster. You told rocket to put up or shut up in terms of his comments regarding the perception that you are attacking other teams, rather than promoting your own. It disturbs me to see potential leadership criticizing others for the very behaviour that they are exhibiting.

Hey I just wanted to say I've spent the last few days reading everything (I mean everythinggg) about Mr Alkerton & one other candidate, just wanted to say, GOODLUCK today and tomorrow! And thank you for keeping your actions and your campaign professional!

Originally Posted by Ian Finlay

Problem with this is we have in the same message personal statements which you would only know if you knew the person as well. Such as stating you are coming down with something and feeling pretty sick. Because many of these teams know eachother on a personal level beyond campaigning, it is pretty easy to pick out the people. What is even more sad is Mary KNEW this was going on and told us, but she did not go on and ask people to stop(in her name of without a name). If she was truely worried about dirty politics she would have been proactive.

I suppose there is the argument that you could pick specific people out based on what they said, but that's a little bit iffy. I mean, it could be simply a similar situation, or (hopefully not) someone who was told information in confidence repeating it on an anonymous forum to rile people up.

As well, for the record, Mary did ask the forum to be nice to all candidates and about other aspects of the campaign etc., but of course asking an anonymous forum that is supposed to be private to censor itself is akin to asking a polar bear not to eat a seal. Or some other vague metaphor, you get the gist.

Anyway, what's more important is that everyone just get out and VOTE today and tomorrow!

Originally Posted by Bothwell

Huzaifa and Deadpool,

I understand the difficulties that come with campaigning, and how easy it is for opposing teams to blur the line between legitimate critiques of a position, and deliberate misinformation and slander. That being said, your initial concern (that Mary's campaign team was slandering Kieran's team) is clearly a valid concern. But it seems to me that you are leaving yourself wide open to rocket's claim, which was that Kieran's team is basing their platform on criticizing the actions of others, more than they are constructing an actual platform. Why do I say this?
You publicly criticized Mary's team for slander, without any justification for this. When pressed, you follow up that the A&S anonymous community board has slanderous comments regarding Kieran's team on the threads, with the names of people on Mary's campaign signed to them. When further investigated, the scenario that comes out is that the boards are anonymous and that anyone could (and likely did) post such slander. If you're aware that people are concerned that your platform is suspect in this regard, it seems to me you should take care to limit your exposure to accusations of libel. Message boads are busy and your initial post (the validity of which is open to question) stated as fact something that may or may not be true. You should either pursue and verify your accusations in this instance that Mary's campaign is using slander (by which I mean you should accuse someone and give them a chance to defend themselves fairly), or withdraw said accusations entirely. There is far too much mudslinging going on; this is 'yOUR' chance to reduce the volume, and demonstrate your integrity for the students of McMaster. You told rocket to put up or shut up in terms of his comments regarding the perception that you are attacking other teams, rather than promoting your own. It disturbs me to see potential leadership criticizing others for the very behaviour that they are exhibiting.

First of Bothwell, There is conclusive proof that there were two members of her team writting these things. Scrambles it is not iffy, It would be enough to prove it. Either way...

Second, Kierans Campaign has been about his platform. He has a stronger one than any other candidate with support already amounting from Students, and University Officials. To say that Kieran has not developed a platform is extremely wrong.

The point of campaigns is for political discourse. If you are upset someone is attacking your points and they have valid concern, instead of being upset you should find ways to make your platform better. This is the idea which underlies Mill's arguement of freedom of speech. If you cannot discuss ideas you cannot prove you are right, or find out why you are wrong. This provides an arena to find truth. This is the heart and soul of our Democratic Political Process. If you can't deal with the criticisms while running, how can you deal with the criticisms when in office. Look, even Vishal is getting ragged on right now on a seperate thread. This happens and if it is about someones character without proof that is beyond unfair, but if it is about the ideas and platform points which a candidate puts forth, that's Democracy!

Originally Posted by Ian Finlay

What is even more sad is Mary KNEW this was going on and told us, but she did not go on and ask people to stop(in her name of without a name). If she was truely worried about dirty politics she would have been proactive.

Hi Ian,

This is the post in question, please note the timestamp.


And contrary to your claims of her "not [going on] and [asking] people to stop(in her name of [sic] without a name)", this is Mary's response. Again, please notice the timestamp.



This was in addition to a post on her campaign website, as well as a Facebook message to her Facebook Group. I feel that screenshots of those would be unnecessarily porcupine-like on my part, but can be supplied if you so wish.

Regardless, best of luck today and tomorrow!

Originally Posted by zeChinaman

Hi Ian,

This is the post in question, please note the timestamp.


And contrary to your claims of her "not [going on] and [asking] people to stop(in her name of [sic] without a name)", this is Mary's response. Again, please notice the timestamp.



This was in addition to a post on her campaign website, as well as a Facebook message to her Facebook Group. I feel that screenshots of those would be unnecessarily porcupine-like on my part, but can be supplied if you so wish.

Regardless, best of luck today and tomorrow!

That is one screenshot of one of the comments. How about the other comments? Mary posted that once we had discussed these things with her. Just saying.

first of all, if my comments were those 'made by members of mary's campaign team', maybe you should brush up on your sleuthing skills...i am not and have never been affiliated with mary's team in any way. yes, i am supporting her, but so are hundreds of others. secondly, everything i posted was a combination of things taken directly off of macinsiders (and statements made by your own team), and my own opinions on the matter. if you want to say that mary is running a dirty campaign, check your facts next time.

Originally Posted by neila.b

first of all, if my comments were those 'made by members of mary's campaign team', maybe you should brush up on your sleuthing skills...i am not and have never been affiliated with mary's team in any way. yes, i am supporting her, but so are hundreds of others. secondly, everything i posted was a combination of things taken directly off of macinsiders (and statements made by your own team), and my own opinions on the matter. if you want to say that mary is running a dirty campaign, check your facts next time.

To clarify, I in no way mean mary is running a dirty campaign. Her supporters may not be treating candidates fairly. Mary herself cannot run each one of her supporters lives. She has kept to it that she is not bad mothing others. I would however refer to my post which has part of it talking about political discourse.

As much as I like being called scrambles, as my public profile reveals I am in fact Harrison, so everyone can call me as such. Or stick to scrambles. They're both good!

Originally Posted by Ian Finlay

That is one screenshot of one of the comments. How about the other comments? Mary posted that once we had discussed these things with her. Just saying.

Ian, there are at this point probably hundreds of comments in this forum making snide remarks and petty attacks at pretty much all candidates, including Mary. An anonymous forum won't stop being mean just because you tell it to (believe me, I have tried oh so many times). Yang has simply shown you that Mary did take a stand against such comments. If this was after you discussed the problem with her, then that is understandable because it would have been fair for Mary to presume not to try and censor what is a private anonymous forum. Because as is clear mere minutes after her post, it is a fruitless attempt.

But that is what bothers me about all of this more than anything else. I think that Kieran has an excellent platform and is a superb candidate, I do prefer Mary's platform as was clear when I chose to be part of her team and not his, but that's beside the point. The forum in question is supposed to be private, a "safe zone" if you will, where one might vent thoughts and feelings regardless of their nature, be they profound or idiotic. It is unnerving that others have not only gained access to this forum without proper consent (having your friend sign you on does not count), but also that they would consider any information on it to be legitimate.

Anyway, I know that as a campaign team member and as a regular old nobody I harbor absolutely no bad blood toward any candidates (or former candidates) and can honestly and happily say I will be quite pleased regardless of this elections outcome (though clearly I would prefer Mary). Because all the candidates are so great.
Regardless, good luck to all candidates and everyone make sure you Get out and Vote!

Originally Posted by scrambles

As much as I like being called scrambles, as my public profile reveals I am in fact Harrison, so everyone can call me as such. Or stick to scrambles. They're both good!

The profile does say Hary Cruiks. I probably would have got that but.... Haha. Anyways Harrison, I disagree with a lot of the things you said but will not respond because I am not wanting to continue on with this discussion. We have lots of campaigning to do still. And besides, we need to help kieran out as much as we can, he can't go out into the sunlight seeing as he is a vampire and all haha.(joking reference to posts about kieran)


***Note*** Kieran is not a vampire. Unless that will get him his own movie series like those vampires from Twilight... That would be cool.

Originally Posted by Ian Finlay

The profile does say Hary Cruiks. I probably would have got that but.... Haha. Anyways Harrison, I disagree with a lot of the things you said but will not respond because I am not wanting to continue on with this discussion. We have lots of campaigning to do still. And besides, we need to help kieran out as much as we can, he can't go out into the sunlight seeing as he is a vampire and all haha.(joking reference to posts about kieran)


***Note*** Kieran is not a vampire. Unless that will get him his own movie series like those vampires from Twilight... That would be cool.

All that sounds good to me! Best of luck on the trail! Everyone reading this get off your computer and GO VOTE!

Originally Posted by Ian Finlay

Mary posted that once we had discussed these things with her. Just saying.

Hi Ian,

I don't see a particular problem with that course of action. The "Just saying." is either a very sarcastic or very emphatic QED...I'm not quite sure which. But perhaps it's because you believe that

Originally Posted by Ian Finlay

If she was truely worried about dirty politics she would have been proactive.

The premise you are assuming here is that Mary checks the anonymous forum as frequently as some of us check MacInsiders. The timestamps show that Mary's response came nearly 21hrs (1am posting, 9pm response) later than the original post. As seen from all of the candidates' threads on MacInsiders, candidates have limited time to check and respond to comments on internet message boards, given that they are out campaigning during the day and going to their own classes. It is a well-known fact on the anonymous forum that Mary is not a regular. In fact, it seems that the only times she checks and reads it is when people notify her of things such as the subject of this discussion. I think asking her to pre-emptively ask the forum to self-censor is a bit like asking all of MacInsiders to keep posts on Casey's thread cordial and on-topic before any of the campaigning started.

tldr (please correct me if you feel I have misinterpreted your argument)
You feel that Mary had knowledge of slanderous posts on the anonymous forum but only responded once Team Kieran brought this up with her.

I counter with the premise that Mary does not check the anonymous forum regularly at all and probably only found out about the slanderous posts when you spoke to her about it.

You might counter with

Originally Posted by Ian Finlay

What is even more sad is Mary KNEW this was going on and told us, but she did not go on and ask people to stop(in her name of [sic] without a name).

and my response is: as the second part of that statement has been shown to be false, let us discuss the first. I'm not at all clear temporally how events unfolded. Did she tell you first? Or did you tell her first? And what did each party say at the first unveiling of this issue?

The only reason I'm so onerous on this is because I feel that there was a implied criticism of Mary's character à la

Originally Posted by Ian Finlay

Mary posted that once we had discussed these things with her. Just saying.

and I personally feel that that is not true. That's all.

Like Harrison said,

Originally Posted by scrambles

Best of luck on the trail! Everyone reading this get off your computer and GO VOTE!

Mary brought the posts to our attention saying she saw many Art Sci students concerned with Kieran and the way he was conducting his campaign. When someone on our team logged on to SASS Web to find out what was going on, We then noted the responses and talked to Mary, asking for her to clarify her own personal feelings on the subject since she agreed with us she did not feel kieran or his team were participating in Dirty Politics.

Therefore your claim that she did not check the forum and probably did not know about it until we brought it to her attention is wrong. Being proactive also did not mean to tell people to be nice before the campaign. It meant when she noticed this the first time, not to pass it off and only tell us in passing, but to either a)tell us what was happening in good faith, or b) just a quick message saying "hey everyone, lets try to keep it on the issues not the personalities" or anything along those lines. both would have taken seconds.